Skip to main content
8:30 pm
its auto insurance customers for over 70 years.e to more information on auto insurance at geico.com or 1-800-947-auto any time of the day or night.
8:31 pm
>> what do you think a tree can be? can it be stronger than steel? can a tree be biodegradable plastic? can it be fuel for our cars? or medicine that fights cancer? with our tree cell technology, we think it can. weyerhaeuser, growing ideas. >> this week on "inside wash." earthquake and sonata in the pacific rim of fire. >> there is nothing radical or on american about holding these hearings. >> the king hearings on muslims
8:32 pm
in america. >> i am concerned that today's hearings may increase suspicion on the muslim american community. >> in wisconsin, the state senate votes to restrict collective bargaining rights from public workers. >> this is about protecting the middle class in a way that avoids massive tax increases and laos. >> in washington, congress tries to get its budget act together. >> we have to start prioritizing spending. >> ragtag forces in libya hang on. should the u.s. intervene? and national public radio shoots itself in the foot again. >> let me say at the outset we are putting this program
8:33 pm
together on friday as we are getting the details on the earthquake and tsunami in japan. we do not have a lot to add other than modern science and technology has allowed scientists on the west coast and in hawaii to warn residents that the tsunami was coming. as always, the u.s. navy is ready to respond to events in the pacific with the military relief. the program is called "inside wash.." let me begin in washington. it has been a long while since congressional hearings have brought up so much publicity, much of it negative. this one was about homegrown terrorism with emphasis on home run muslims. ever since he announced the hearings, peter king has been accused of being a latter-day joan mcnerney, but he refused to back down. >> to back them would be an abdication of what i believe should be the main responsibility of this committee, to protect america from a terrorist attack.
8:34 pm
>> when you assign their violent actions to the entire community, you assigned collective blame to a whole group. this is the very heart of stereotyping and scapegoating. >> that is democratic congressman keith ellison of minnesota. according to a recent study by the triangle center of terrorism and, insecurity, a collaborative effort between duke university, north carolina, and rti international, a 11 muslim americans have successfully executed terrorist attacks since 9/11. however, tips from the muslim american community provided information that helped to defeat plots in 49 of 120 cases. colby, do these hearings make sense to you? >> had they been thiconstructed differently.
8:35 pm
"the economist" said that this would be similar to handle a sensitive subject with a steamroller. i think the first part of the hearing could have been very useful, that is not what it was. he built it up as the radicalization of muslims in the muslim community, and the muslim commodity -- community's response to it. after the attacks in london, we said it could not happen here because we have taken in the muslim community. we were wrong. but why is it that way? we do not look at it and see why. >> charles? >> homeland security department itself said that the major threat of islamic radical terrorism is internal. we have had some success since 9/11 keeping the externals from our country -- from coming into
8:36 pm
our country and attacking. but the problem is the fort hood shooters, the times square attacker, all of those. the somali kid then end up in somalia. we know they are radicalized and america. of course it is a problem. the attack on the king has been nothing but an attack on political correctness of very high order. >> the net? >> that term political correctness is, at this point, an epithet. >> it was meant as an epithet. >> i understand that. in this case, it is incredibly not constructive. i actually think these hearings, even if they were about homegrown terrorism in the muslim community, could have been constructive. but the second part of the hearings, why isn't the muslim
8:37 pm
community doing more to -- fill in the blank -- so that the onus was put on the muslim community? there is a good deal to learn about this. the head of counterterrorism in the bush administration said this week that if the emphasis had been on the first part, we may have learned something, but those witnesses did not tell us anything. >> mark? >> the champions of the hearings have to be disappointed, and so did the critics. the first day was anything but the inquisition. nobody was burned at the stake. nobody was carried away in handcuffs. i do not know what will come of the hearings. it has certainly given attention to the discussion. obviously, both sides will have a full airing of their positions. >> what did we learn, anything we did not know? >> the hearings consisted of
8:38 pm
three members of congress, one parent, one other individual who was an advocate for muslim americans, and a sheriff from l.a. county. if they had had a panel of law enforcement experts from across the country discussing the nation alal scope of the countr, discussing it from a sociological and political point of view, why is this happening, how is this coming about, it is in being exploited by al qaeda, is it really homegrown? then we would be learning something. >> i agree with you that the hearings were not structured really well. however, the reason it was hiked because it was -- hyped was
8:39 pm
because it was attacked before it even occurred. the idea of holding these hearings was somehow an american or mccarthy-like. >> many people criticized king because of his ties with the irish republican army. >> you can accuse him of hypocrisy but you cannot say that holding a hearing on the radicalization of young muslims in america is either irrelevant or insidious. it has happened, is deadly, and we need to understand. >> peter king's personal history was that he was sympathetic to the ira. because of that, he was one of the most effective brokers in the peace agreement, commanded by bill clinton and tony blair for his constructive and positive role he played. in 2005, he called for the abolition of the ira.
8:40 pm
>> if this is a problem, and i certainly think homegrown radicalization is, i am not sure how big of a problem yet, but we do not want it to be a big problem. then the people that you call on are not the people that they called in the hearing. you do not build a hearing -- which it was. the second half of the building was an attack on the muslim community for not doing enough. >> it starts with having 13 dead at fort hood. he was an army captain. >> if you want to know how to do something about this, this is not the way. this was an attack. >> the governor in wisconsin is playing hardball. >> is had been the pearl harbor of workers' rights issues. >> if you do not pass major reforms in collective
8:41 pm
bargaining, local governments were not able to balance their budgets in the future. >> all hell broke loose at the wisconsin state capitol after republicans used procedural maneuvers to ram through a bill that strict most of the rights from public workers. democrats were hiding out across state lines in illinois, thought that they had short circuit in the bill, but gov. walker found a way to get through them. he is a hero to some but a scoundrel to union members. how will this play out for him politically? >> i will tell you what governor weicker is doing. he presents his case, i thought in a measured way -- walker is doing. he took what was at a red state last november, it was just a
8:42 pm
sweep, he is taking it and turning it into a blue state. the man he beat, tom barrett, the mayor of -- the former mayor of milwaukee -- is now trailing by double digits. in every public opinion nationally, voters endorsed collective bargaining rights for public employees. is less popular now in wisconsin and then public employee unions. >> americans have the taurus the short memories. i wonder how long that will sustain itself. >> look at what happened in indiana. when mitch daniels became governor, by executive order, he did what governor walker did by legislation. he had a comfortable victory. his numbers went to 37% approval. what he said about what the results would be turned out to be right.
8:43 pm
he balanced the budget, improve the efficiency of the government, he was reelected by 60%. if walker is right, that this is needed to save money for the government, which could then be used in other areas, spare laos, etc., and the economy is strong, he will win. all of this depends now on whether the proposition he laid out about the union's crippling government and making it impossible to carry out its work rationally and within a budget, is right or not, and we will see. >> there is a sea change difference between mitch daniels and walker. i know mitch daniels. he did not galvanize the opposition the way that walker did. he went out of his way to do that. he tried to make a strong political statement on behalf of individuality. ok, he became the poster boy.
8:44 pm
you are welcome for it. now he could be paying the price. >> indiana law allowed him to do without legislation. with wisconsin law, you could not do it without executive order. >> there are significant differences between what happened in indiana and wisconsin. i have been around long enough where i do not predict with any confidence what is going to happen in two years or a year. i do think that walker now meets the criteria of the powell doctrine. he broke it. it is his. this defines them as governor. it defines his party even more. it may prove to be a costly victory for the republican
8:45 pm
party. >> how about what is happening on capitol hill? we have until the 18th of march, shut out of the government, if congress does not fund it. >> they will fund it. right now, republicans are on the offensive, democrats on the defensive. the fifth will be a test. state supreme court, a davidplosser is being challenged by a democrat. this will be a fight over the constitutionality of what governor weicker has done. >> a quick word on david broder, the dean of the washington political journal. i cannot imagine covering a political campaign without seeing david broder of they're talking to a precinct captain and ordinary voters. >> i had the privilege of being in the news room with david broder.
8:46 pm
people see him on tv. they see him as a commentator. i watched him as a reporter. david broder, the reporter. i learned so much from him. he did one thing that wvery welt we do not do very well here. he listened. i try to emulate him. bad day, but a lot of us tried to emulate david. he was the quintessential journalist. >> he was such a gentleman. when i was a young reporter and he was already there, he was so generous. he was so nice he worked every bit as hard as i did, at 20- something. he was a remarkable reporter. >> a great, unrivaled, shoe leather reporter. remembered for his countless kindnesses to the new reporter on the beat. he would sit down and share his
8:47 pm
sources, ideas, and all the information he had, which was really beyond pierre. >> a great journalist, but above all, a great gentleman. >> i want to call upon mark shields who the other day said that david never fell victim to self importance. >> which never happened on this program. >> how to deal with qaddafi. >> are you scared? >> i am not scared. my god is for me. >> that is a 22-year-old college students taking -- speaking with an abc news correspondent. france has recognized the libyan country. should the u.s. to intervene militarily? >> i would be circumspect about that 14 of your reasons. humanitarian interventions can end badly, as we learned in
8:48 pm
somalia. do you have to ask yourself, do we have a strategic interest here? libya, no. you might argue that we have a larger interest in showing u.s. democracy. trying to sway the outcome of a war, where clearly qaddafi is on the offensive, the rebels do not have a clue, is dangerous. we could be sucked into a civil war. >> there are a couple of opinions on shutting down the libyan air force, which is not all formidable. >> our own defense department has reservations about it. we are selling them helicopters and all that. france recognized the opposition, but at the same time, sarkozy said, they had reservations on military
8:49 pm
operations because arab revolution belong to the arab people. what is happening is we are waiting to see some sign that the arab league of nations, the african may, can respond to this. the best thing we can do -- worst thing we can do is have them hold on and then we go and and fight on their behalf. >> this is a race against time. qaddafi has a military force, trained troops. in a race against time, i suspect he is going to win. certainly, the intelligence chiefs seemed to suggest that. when you do a no-fly zone, there is almost always a chapter 2. when that does not mark the way everyone says -- if you destroy air power, it will be fine. it will not be fine. >> mark? >> i find myself agreeing with
8:50 pm
charles, which mean that one of us or both are wrong. [laughter] it is no question a time for soul-searching. at the same time, we have found out these are no cakewalks, as they were billed in iraq -- >> or afghanistan. >> for that reason, we just have to make that judgment. >> and let me make a correction, there are two muslim members of congress. nina, fasten your seat belt. npr's bumpy ride just ahead. >> it would be better in the long run. >> that is ron schiller, the former head of fundraising at npr, caught on tape by a group of fake muslim donors.
8:51 pm
members of congress are ready to take them up on the offer, cutting off funding. he had some unpleasant things to say about the republican party, tea party. after the story broke, the president and ceo resigned. i offered nina the chance to take a week off. she resigned -- she declined. she wanted to defend her company. >> i cannotend the top executives and i cannot defend the board, but i can defend the the product. there is a reason we are the only news organization, other than fox, with a growing audience. it is because our product. straight-shooting, factual, and spends an enormous amount of money gathering news from around the country and world. judge us by our product. the people in his room were probably more mortified than charles or anyone in the tea party, anybody else.
8:52 pm
we were horrified. and not by the political incorrectness of what was said, but by the fact that he even thought this way. >> it plays right into the belief that you are a bunch of leftists. >> i know, but it is not true. [laughter] >> obviously, it is a liberal organization. what you're getting is a taste of what people say to each other daily internally. i have no objection to liberal news organizations. the difference between npr growing, fox growing, is that fox is not holding out a tin cup for taxpayer money. i want npr to thrive, but not on my time. >> i think nprm ought to take the initiative and say we do not want a subsidy. >> would not kill some of the stations? >> we should test public support. >> we have a market in the
8:53 pm
country. >> let's go back to the proponent we saw on tv. it was disgusting. he was pandering to get some money. he would say anything to get $5 million. >> there are nine her 34 public radio stations. a lot of them are in very remote rural areas and they only serve the kind of information we are talking about. -- 934 public radio stations. great, factual reporting. they do not have deep pockets like those in the upper west side of manhattan. >> i am deeply moved, but i would make two points. i do not know why a steelworker in pittsburgh has to subsidize that. and in a world of the thousand tv stations, radio stations, internet, if they are going to miss out on a program, there will be other ways to get it. we are no longer a country with
8:54 pm
3 network stations and nothing else. that was the reason we had pbs in the first place. we are now flooded with -- >> bad information. >> and of course, npr is good information, which is why i should subsidize it there, right? >> in an era when newspapers are disappearing in droves, daily, and commercial forces, both in television and radio, have driven out -- you know, there is a reason npr has more foreign viewers than any other broadcasting organization in the country, with the possible exception of cnn. more foreign bureaus. we were the organization that broke the bp story. the obama administration was not telling us the truth about the amount of the oil leak. we do the job that news
8:55 pm
organizations used to do, and really do not any more. they are covering charlie sheen. >> when you talk about those smaller stations out there, if there is a legitimate demand for this product, they will find a way to get it. you market it. that is what you do. you do not subsidize it. >> if the british can do it, how come the americans cannot? >> it is a in institution with great personnel working, on the air, producing, reporting, and has had a stewardship that has been a singularly counterproductive, harmful -- >> if the product is so superior, why does it have to live on the tit of the state? the tone of which you defended is exactly reflective of what we heard in this kind of liberal arrogance --
8:56 pm
>> it has to do with spending money. >> we give you good news. well, then, spend your own money. every news organization spends its own. why do you have access to the taxpayer? >> not to have sesame street on, not to teach kids. >> excuse me for speaking well you are interrupting, charles. i would like to make the point, if you watch children's television, it is mind-numbing in the commercialization of it to sell to kids. >> public stations do good work. but it is the kind of work that ought to be supported by the market, the people watching, not by the taxpayer. >> i would just like to point out, newspapers pulled around
8:57 pm
the country. people turn to npr as the business model that works, the one that could produce sustainable news. >> that is news? >> in an area where there are not enough people to support it, you have to have a subsidy. >> only part of the market. >> i am personally a fan of the npr supreme court correspondent. see you next week. for a transcript of this dcbr lasoan ogt, insidewashington.tv.
8:58 pm
vo:geico, committed to providing service to its auto insurance customers for over 70 years. more information on auto insurance at geico.com or 1-800-947-auto any time of the day or night.
8:59 pm

tv
Inside Washington
WETA March 11, 2011 8:30pm-9:00pm EST

News/Business. Round-table discussions feature nationally recognized journalists. (CC)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Wisconsin 6, Npr 5, David Broder 4, America 4, Us 4, Washington 3, Indiana 3, Mitch Daniels 3, U.s. 3, Ira 2, Peter King 2, Walker 2, Qaddafi 2, Weicker 2, Nina 2, Laos 2, Somalia 2, France 2, Libya 2, Insidewashington 1
Network WETA
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in Annapolis, MD, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 78 (549 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 4/20/2011
Views
190